The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday passed legislation requiring that undocumented youth be turned over to federal immigration officials for possible deportation only after they're convicted of a felony - not upon their arrest.

The 8-2 vote, enough to override an expected veto from Mayor Gavin Newsom, prompted loud cheers from scores of immigrant rights advocates, clergy and high school students who packed the board meeting - but the jubilation may not last long.

Newsom will give no credence to Supervisor David Campos' legislation, according to the mayor's spokesman, Nathan Ballard. Instead, the mayor will continue to direct law enforcement officials to turn youth over to federal officials as soon as they're arrested on felony charges.

"The Campos bill isn't worth the paper it's written on - it's unenforceable and he knows that," Ballard said. "We are not going to put our law enforcement officers in legal jeopardy just because the Board of Supervisors wants to make a statement."

Ballard said the mayor's office will work closely with the city attorney to ensure probation officers aren't forced to break federal law for the sake of abiding by the legislation.

Campos, who briefly left the meeting after the vote to celebrate with a joyful crowd outside chanting "Yes we can!" said the mayor can't pick and choose which city laws to follow.

"We expect the mayor's office to follow the laws of the city and county of San Francisco - that's his job," said Campos, who himself arrived in this country as an undocumented immigrant from Guatemala. "If he refuses to do that, the board will have to figure out what our options are."

Legal conflicts

The city attorney's office declined to comment. But a memo the office wrote to Newsom in August regarding Campos' legislation and its potential legal pitfalls seems to encourage ignoring the newly passed legislation.

The memo reads in part, "Based on the primacy of federal law and in light of potential federal criminal liability, we historically have advised and will continue to advise city officials, including the Juvenile Probation Department, that until further clarification by the federal courts, federal law prohibits the City from taking any adverse action against a City official or employee who reports a juvenile to federal immigration authorities."

Juvenile Probation Chief William Siffermann said his department will consult with the city attorney's office and outside legal counsel "regarding the impact this legislation will have upon our existing protocols."

"My ability to override federal law doesn't exist," he said. "I can't prohibit any officials from reporting instances where there's a reasonable belief that civil immigration laws have been violated."

Reversing policy

Under federal law, a city cannot prohibit its employees from releasing information about an individual's immigration status. The Chronicle last year reported the city was doing exactly that by shielding undocumented youth convicted of felonies from deportation - including Edwin Ramos, the alleged killer of Tony Bologna and two of his sons.

Newsom, running for governor, changed the policy so authorities would turn over any undocumented youth arrested for a felony. But the supervisors, immigrant rights advocates and others say the mayor has traded one extreme for another.

They point to youth arrested for relatively minor felonies such as graffiti being separated from their families, and even legal residents turned over to immigration authorities. Supporters of Campos' amendment say most juveniles arrested on suspicion of a felony later see those charges dropped to a lesser offense in court.

Campos said his own legislation, which was opposed by Supervisors Carmen Chu and Sean Elsbernd, is legally viable. More importantly, it stands up for due process and the notion that everybody, regardless of immigration status, is innocent until proved guilty, Campos said.

To his supporters gathered outside board chambers following the vote, Campos said, "The fact that you're undocumented doesn't mean you're not a person under the United States Constitution. If we can't stand up for the Constitution in San Francisco, then where can we stand up for it in this country?"